Detailing World Forum banner

Are MOT's Really Worth The Paper They Are Written On?

2K views 20 replies 15 participants last post by  ollienoclue 
#1 ·
I am having serious doubts about the validity of MOTS TBH

I have for the last couple of weeks been looking for a tow car for a so to be acquired caravan

Initially I was looking at LR Disco's & Range Rovers which rapidly stopped after using the MOT checker to check the MOT history of various cars
https://www.gov.uk/check-mot-history

I was speaking to my son yesterday about this & he was a little unsure

So I fired up Gumtree and at random pulled out a 2004 Landrover Discovery to show him what I meant
Its this one
https://www.gumtree.com/p/land-rover/landrover-discovery-td5/1335597659

So I did the MOT checker history thing & wow :doublesho
Not only is the history of this unbelievable but how on earth did it pass a MOT with all those advisories

Monitor and repair if necessary (advisories):

Oil leak ()
Passenger seat(s) missing at time of test ()
Nearside Upper Brake pipe slightly corroded front to rear (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Lower Brake pipe slightly corroded front to rear (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Front Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
nsf inner wing corroded and holed
vehicle chassis patch repaired in multiple areas, the areas have been covered and painted over
areas behind rear air springs slightly corroded
Offside Front chassis to body outrigger corroded
under side of vehicle slightly corroded in many areas, filler materiel applied and over painted, firm to finger pressure.
Front both inner wheel arches slightly corroded, plastic liners fitted.

How on earth can it pass an MOT with the 2 points I have highlighted and under lined let alone all the other stuff

Bearing in mind I have seen MOT fails on a single number plate light bulb being out

Best (or worst which ever way you look at it) is the current owners quote in the selling blurb -
'only 2 months mot can sort that if it's a problem as cant see it being a issue passing'

So back to my original question. Are MOT's really worth it when quite obvious death traps like the above Disco's are getting MOT's?
 
See less See more
#2 ·
PS The above Disco failed that MOT before it passed with those advisories
This is what it failed on -

Reason(s) for failure

Nearside Front Suspension spring mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded chassis (2.4.A.3)
Nearside Front Suspension component mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded chassis , multiple areas (2.4.A.3)
Offside Front Suspension component mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded chassis, multiple areas (2.4.A.3)
Offside Front Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Rear Vehicle structure inadequately repaired seriously affecting its strength within 30cm of towbar mounting chassis filled with filler materiel (6.6.6)
Nearside Registration plate lamp not working (1.1.C.1d)
Offside Front Lower Front suspension ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)

Truly frightening !
 
#3 ·
The 2015 MOT had a lot of corrosion, it cleared for two years before returning badly. Maybe poor repairs or maybe a friendly tester.

Lots of things aren't instant fails.

I've no doubt there is loads of dodgy MOTs. People want to see clean MOT certificates and dealers get friendly people to help.

I don't like car dealers who get to do their own tests.
 
#4 · (Edited)
Sadly it's seems to be a bit hit and miss.

There are some great MoT stations/testers out there who are honest and reliable and apply the Regs with consistency. I've used one of two for for bikes & cars for around 3 decades and absolutely trust them to be thorough and fair and keep me and others safe.

And there's some that obviously don't :(.

I have erm... reservations, about some of the adverts that say a vehicle will be given a new MoT when you buy it.

I did find this about VOSA's checking regime.

https://mattersoftesting.blog.gov.uk/tackling-mot-fraud-protecting-us-from-unsafe-drivers-and-vehicles/

IMHO far more useful is a knowledgeable owner with a shed load of receipts.

Good Luck with your search.

Andy.
 
#6 · (Edited)
That is the thing though, they are just advisories until they are more serious.

When the underseal or paint falls off it will probably be a failure.

I believe the tester is not allowed to poke through paint and underseal. I think the old guys years ago used to at the expense of damaging the coating.

Some items are down to the tester. There will be differing interpretations on how bad a spot of corrosion looks.

There can obviously be no interpretation on whether a bulb is working or not as to the result of the MOT test.

An MOT states at the time of the test the vehicle passed. It could fail another test just after leaving the station.

I am sure I have seen words like "an MOT shouldn't be used as an indication as to the roadworthiness when buying a second hand vehicle."

So you are perhaps partly correct that an MOT isn't worth the paper it is written on.
 
#7 ·
An MOT is only really valid at the time of test, a spring can snap, a tyre get cut all seconds after the car is backed out of the bay.

We have 3 testers and they are reasonably consistent, and by that i mean if they test the same car year in year out the same advisories appear, however if the 3 of them were to test the same car the results may be slightly different.

Its all down to interpretation of the rules, while people don't like their car failing and have a thing for advisories i don't see it being a problem. A tester cannot remove parts (which is why child seats are always an advisory) or fix things (which is why they fail on screen wash - if you don't want this as a fail then fill it up before testing) If they see something they cannot be sure of then it has to be marked as an advisory.

To be fair the advisories on the discos wouldn't put me off, just budget to put them right, at the end of the day they are a 15 year old car that if used for work rust and everything seizes. Brake pipes are very common as they are on the Disco 3 where they go over the rear diff towards the front.

Subarus and Saab 9-5s have very good towing weights, Mitsu Shoguns are good but rust, Freelanders are pretty good too.
 
#8 ·
The mot test is fine. It can never be all things to all people.
It is the unrealistic and often wrong assumptions /expectations, that are put on it by people, coupled with the general lack of understanding/willingness to understand, to read and digest the criteria and process as to what the test actually is, despite it being made clear that "The vehicle met the standards "At the time of test" and the MOT is no guarantee that the vehicle will remain roadworthy for the next year, that is the problem.
As Steve says it is "At the time of test" and at the test it met the standards and what was seen has been advised.
The tester tests to the standards by prescribed methods and cannot remove coating or make holes in things. They are responsible for any damage.
The evidence is there. It is up to you to make a judgement, if it troubles you or not and/or whether you understand the implications or not.
There is nothing that suggests it is a death trap or otherwise. Worthy of further investigation, questions, perhaps.
You have to also bear in mind that, in the main, what troubles you would probably not trouble me in the least because I can fix/repair, just about anything, if needs be. So if the vehicle was cheap but a bit scabby underneath, it might be ideal for me but not for you. The point is the test was carried out correctly.
If either troubles you then either forget it or take it to someone or someone to it, who actually knows and get their assessment, bearing in mind that no assessment of the engine, gearbox, rear axle, transfer box, paint, interior etc etc etc has been made.
To use the MOT as a tool to make a buying decision is unrealistic and foolish unless you understand It is not what it is for, never has been and I doubt ever will be. It is certainly not possible unless you are willing to pay much more for it.
The only sensible way is to have a complete and proper inspection by someone who knows and is accountable for their assessment.
It can only be about the paper it is written on if you understand and accept what the test is for and about.
 
#9 ·
Mots are there for the usual few who spoil it for the majority.
Let's face it, if they stopped mots tomorrow there would be a few that would quite happily drive a deathtrap all over the place. So we need regulation to stop it happening.
I've commented on here before about my wife's car having advisories on brakes a few years back, nothing changed and they've never been mentioned since!
New cars not having them for 3 yrs too is great but I'd rather drive an older well maintained car than a year old one with bald tyres.
 
#11 ·
The ones that do fail deserve to fail, most fail on tyres, brakes and suspension. Given a tyre has to be less than 1.6 mm and pads less than 1.5mm you really get a feel for just how bad some cars can be. These are usually family cars with child seats in them.

I had a car in today that the owner asked us to check the tyres on, the fronts had the canvas showing, the rear was bald on the outside edge, completely illegal, could i stop them from driving off ? no, should it be on the road ? no ....
 
#12 ·
I used to have a friendly MOT tester.

One year I took my newly rebuilt R5GTT to them. They failed it on the rear fuel tank-strap and the front ‘top tint’. They told me to change the fuel strap and either cut my top tint in half or fit shorter wiper blades. I changed the fuel tank strap and took it back. ‘Have you cut that top tint in half?’ he asks me. ‘Have I f***, if it had been twice that depth I’d not have seen out of the window!’ (It was a VERY deep top tint!)

He wrote me my MOT out and we agreed that if the Police stop me it wasn’t on when tested! :lol:

Another time, I turned up 10 minutes late for my MOT in my C20LET Corsa B. He takes one look at it and says it’s too low to go on the rollers. I tell him it’s on height adjustable coilovers and I can nip home to get the spanner. He asked what the suspension is? ‘Newly reconditioned Leda coilovers on the front, brand new Spax dampers and GMAX springs on the back!’. So what about the brakes, he asks me? ‘Brand new V6 front callipers with 288mm Fiat Coupe discs on the front, new shoes and cylinders on the back!’

It sounds like we just need to emissions test it, he says. ‘Erm, I was meaning to say about that!’. What do you mean, he asks me? ‘Well, it’s a 1994 Car with a 1992 engine so it doesn’t need a CAT’. He told me he’s not sure about that, so I told him to go and check as I’m not out to blag him. He comes back and confirms I was right but due to where other cars were he couldn’t get me near the exhaust Gas analyser so started up another car and chucked the probe up that.

:lol:
 
#13 ·
A lot of the mot test is based on what they can see at the time of the test.

There is a specific corrosion testing tool which has to be used in a certain manner, if the area passes the test even if the tester things it might be a bodged patch then they have to give benefit of the doubt and pass it. They aren't allowed to start scraping at underseal or pulling things apart.

And yes, when browsing used cars the online mot history checker is a great tool for getting a general feel of how well a car has been looked after.

I'm not a tester, but believe I have a decent knowledge of the requirements. I give our cars a pre-mot at home before taking them in, and use a garage I trust to give a fair and thorough test. I wouldn't want them to pass my car if it shouldn't, but at the same time they know I will do any repairs myself so won't make up a fail to drum up business.

Seems to work, my 2000 BMW compact passed on Monday with no advisories :)
 
#14 ·
The MOT test has it place, but it really needs to go alongside an owner's capacity to know the state of their own vehicle. Some genuinely don't know what mechanical state their vehicle is in nor do they make arrangements to check, whereas others do know but abuse the system.
 
#15 ·
Short of x raying the entire car, you aren't ever able to determine how serious corrosion is, in many cases it is hidden from view by a myriad of plastic panels. I would expect MOT testers to use their judgement. I'd never expect an MOT to give any key as to the mechanical state of the vehicle aside from the state of the steering, suspension, brakes and emissions.
 
#16 ·
as a lot have said the MOT is only really valid for That point in time when it was tested.
it shows that the car reached the MINIMUM standard to be on the road At That point in time, nothing more or less.

MOT history Can however be of use, if "item X " keeps appearing as an advisory for the last "year/years" then its a Good bet You are going to have to fix "item X"

whereas item Y appears, then isnt seen again , At the Same MOT station, its a possibility item Y has been addressed

a car that fails year in year out on bulbs, wiper blades "meh"
but a car that fails year on year for tyres/brakes/suspension defects "utho"



as for the "new cars dont Need a mot for three years" That should be scrapped, 12months mot for all OR dont Bother for all, FAR too many have serious issues inside 3years, and shouldnt be on the road, ESPECIALLY for those (the VAST majority) that do NOT service or maintain there cars At all as "well thats wot the mots for innit" brain deads/dont care/couldnt give a hoot" brigade ,, and there are Millions of those



"Hooky MOTs" happen. there is a whole sub culture almost who think its "groovey/great/etc" to get a MOT for a car that Shouldnt be on the road.


MOT for ALL cars /trucks/etc/etc 12months from date of first registration AND Mot's to only be done by VOSA stations,, will stop the "£2000 work needed to get a mot "gouge that a Lot (not all) do.
 
#18 ·
as a lot have said the MOT is only really valid for That point in time when it was tested.
it shows that the car reached the MINIMUM standard to be on the road At That point in time, nothing more or less.

MOT history Can however be of use, if "item X " keeps appearing as an advisory for the last "year/years" then its a Good bet You are going to have to fix "item X"

whereas item Y appears, then isnt seen again , At the Same MOT station, its a possibility item Y has been addressed

a car that fails year in year out on bulbs, wiper blades "meh"
but a car that fails year on year for tyres/brakes/suspension defects "utho"

as for the "new cars dont Need a mot for three years" That should be scrapped, 12months mot for all OR dont Bother for all, FAR too many have serious issues inside 3years, and shouldnt be on the road, ESPECIALLY for those (the VAST majority) that do NOT service or maintain there cars At all as "well thats wot the mots for innit" brain deads/dont care/couldnt give a hoot" brigade ,, and there are Millions of those

"Hooky MOTs" happen. there is a whole sub culture almost who think its "groovey/great/etc" to get a MOT for a car that Shouldnt be on the road.

MOT for ALL cars /trucks/etc/etc 12months from date of first registration AND Mot's to only be done by VOSA stations,, will stop the "£2000 work needed to get a mot "gouge that a Lot (not all) do.
Are you a tester?
I would be interested in whether you have any evidence to support your claims?
As a tester for nearly forty years I am struggling to recognise much, in what you say, that corresponds to my experience.
 
#17 ·
Over here in NI, MOT tests are carried out at Government testing centres, after the car reaches 4 years old. It's a reasonably thorough test, have a read here. https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/vehicle-test-procedures

I suppose it's only as good as the tester, but a lot of the testing is computer assessed: headlights, brake efficiency and balance, spring/shock efficiency (my focus failed on a worn shock). For the under body check, when the car is on the ramps, there are motorised plates that twist and put lateral pressure on the wheels so the tester can check for any play in suspension joints or worn bushes.

Seems to be a well run system.

Cooks

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
#21 ·
And of course hooky MOTs get done. I bet everyone has seen one or knows someone who does.

I used to work for a company who had a battered pick up truck used purely for farm work and I have no idea how the thing ever passed its MOT year after year, half the time I couldn't even get it into gear so heck knows what the rest of it was like underneath.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top